So, it turns out that the Florida Shooter was Gay

Originally posted by josephw
All that's left is for me to confess I'm a homophobic right wing conservative false God worshipping backwoods butt scratching fart sniffing nose picking booger eating hate mongering brainwashed flea bitten knuckle dragging anthropomorphic sloth. Then you'd be happy!

Has you now taking it upon yourself to apply these labels - to yourself - made your earlier prediction, that you would be labelled in these ways during this discussion, come true, in your own mind?

Originally posted by FMF
Were you hoping that people did care about the arguments you were putting forward?

I was only arguing with you. My hope isn't contingent on what others care about.

Originally posted by FMF
Has you now taking it upon yourself to apply these labels - to yourself - made your earlier prediction, that you would be labelled in these ways during this discussion, come true, in your own mind?

It was a joke. Surely you know that.

Or has it come true in your mind?

Originally posted by josephw
I was only arguing with you. My hope isn't contingent on what others care about.

It's odd then that you'd say "Nobody cares about our stupid argument anyway." My side of our discussion hasn't been "stupid" at all. Do you think your contribution has been? 😉

Originally posted by josephw
It was a joke. Surely you know that.

Or has it come true in your mind?

But you said earlier "There is another perspective, but it is one that is in direct conflict with the pervading world view held by those who deny its existence. Those who don't know it generally lose control and start labeling those of us who do as any manner of things. Want a list?" I saw no indication that it was a joke. And when I asked you about the "list", you ignored it. I guess you've come up with the list now. It's a "joke" list, then? 😉

Originally posted by FMF
It's odd then that you'd say "Nobody cares about our stupid argument anyway." My side of our discussion hasn't been "stupid" at all. Do you think your contribution has been? 😉

Actually, as is nearly always the case, your side of the argument is stupid personified.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Actually, as is nearly always the case, your side of the argument is stupid personified.

How so? I think I laid out my argument in opposition to superstition and belief in divine beings being allowed to obstruct the establishment and fulfillment of human rights, and my opposition to criminalizing homosexuality, and did so quite incisively and relatively concisely while listening and responding to the things josephw was saying.

I also offered a pretty clear stating and explanation of a principled non-religious approach to morality.

I understand and accept that you disagree with my views, but on what basis do you find them "stupid"?

Originally posted by FMF
It's odd then that you'd say "Nobody cares about our stupid argument anyway." My side of our discussion hasn't been "stupid" at all. Do you think your contribution has been? 😉

You know what's really weird? It's almost 2am and I feel like I'm not really real, and I just thought that your post above belongs in the 11,000 Posts thread. 😉

Originally posted by FMF
I understand and accept that you disagree with my views, but on what basis do you find them "stupid"?

On the same basis as you find any other's views stupid.

Originally posted by josephw
On the same basis as you find any other's views stupid.

But how can that be? FreakyKBH has actually called my views on this topic "stupid" and yet I haven't deemed either your views or his to be "stupid". So, on "the same basis as" what?

Originally posted by FMF
But how can that be? FreakyKBH has actually called my views on this topic "stupid" and yet I haven't deemed either your views or his to be "stupid". So, on "the same basis as" what?

Anyone who thinks they can intelligently argue against the existence of God has lost before they utter a word, no matter what follows.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Anyone who thinks they can intelligently argue against the existence of God has lost before they utter a word, no matter what follows.

I think that's very closed thinking old chap.

What you are actually saying is anyone who thinks they can intelligently argue against something 'you believe in' has lost before they utter a word. If you step back a little (not too far remember as the Earth is flat) I'm sure you'll see the erroneous nature of your statement. I think there are intelligent arguments on both sides of 'the God question.' This is to be expected on an issue that remains unproven, even if it has been proven to your own satisfaction.

Originally posted by FMF
But how can that be? FreakyKBH has actually called my views on this topic "stupid" and yet I haven't deemed either your views or his to be "stupid". So, on "the same basis as" what?

Come on. Be forthright and honest. You think what we say is stupid.

Go ahead. It won't hurt. 😉

Originally posted by josephw
Come on. Be forthright and honest. You think what we say is stupid.

Go ahead. It won't hurt. 😉

Smartest guy I've ever known was a theist, so certainly wouldn't put his beliefs down to stupidity.

I think faith (personally) is more to do with the heart. That's not to say intellectual thought isn't part of the process in 'finding God', but I think it is more an emotive issue to cope with the strange world we find ourselves on and our own mortality.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I think that's very closed thinking old chap.

What you are actually saying is anyone who thinks they can intelligently argue against something 'you believe in' has lost before they utter a word. If you step back a little (not too far remember as the Earth is flat) I'm sure you'll see the erroneous nature of your statement. I think there are intell ...[text shortened]... expected on an issue that remains unproven, even if it has been proven to your own satisfaction.

Yes, it is close minded.
We commend close-minded thinking though, don't we?
It is our fervent desire to achieve a level of knowledge on any topic in such a manner as to 'close the book' on the matter, so to speak.
Coincidentally, there are a handful of such topics currently held by the approved academics, taught widely in the schools the world over.
Curiously, it is only a few topics wherein we are rewarded when we parrot back the textbook proclamations, while the entirety of the rest of science fields are said to be malleable and open to and for future clarification and understanding.
Conversely, those who question the status quo, who could be most accurately described as open minded are denigrated, ridiculed and scorned for questioning the textbook answers, let alone offering evidence which defies the same.

I'll stick with an open mind on some things, but for others which have been considered repeatedly and yet consistently produced the same results, I will remain close minded.